Why is Web 2.0 important in our classrooms?From the article: Moving Toward Web 2.0 in K-12 Education
- Authenticity- Both having an authentic audience, and having the contributed work be authentic, argue for Web 2.0 as an active part of K-12 education. Students today are creating on the Web for very real audiences, and their writing or production has to pass a very real test: are they communicating well? Whether it is the peer audience in school which keeps their Web 2.0 programs within the “walled garden” of the school network, or it is publishing for the world, both the work and the audience are authentic.
- Engagement- Because the engagement of Web 2.0 is in the act of content creation, and seems to exist independent of the particular program being used or even of being in a formal learning environment, this claim seems not only reasonable but compelling. Students who continue to post to their blog or to stay involved in discussion forums during their vacations exemplify the power of Web 2.0 to engage students because of the authentic nature of the work rather than being required assignments.
- Participation- Previously, to pursue an educational interest as part of a larger part of one’s life work, that interest had to be within the relatively narrow confines of existing institutional structures in order to be worthy of publication or presentation–and was rarely available to students. A student can write a report on an historical figure, or a scientific theory, and both publish that to the web and also participate in meaningful ways with other students and adults interested in the same topic.
- Access to Information- The backbone of the Internet “Revolution” is openness. Open computer standards, open software, and open content. Web 2.0 is making obsolete many of the restrictions on access to information. The ability to “look something up” or to learn something new has never been greater.
- Collaboration- Web 2.0 has actually given real practical value to a character trait we wanted to instill. In the world of Web 2.0, collaboration is not only king, but it can be seen and assessed–look at the history page of a wiki, for example, or the linked list of contributed comments on the personal profile page of a social network. Web 2.0 has created an unparalleled ability to build or participate in personal learning networks and communities of interest or practice.
- Creativity- A regular student can write, film, and edit a video which then can be uploaded to YouTube and potentially seen by more of an audience than some commercial films actually .
- Personal Expression- More than just the ability to build a profile page on MySpace, Web 2.0 actually gives both students and educators to build for themselves a online portfolio of the endeavors they are passionate about. Where the resume and the degrees have been our short-cut indicators of abilities and accomplishments, the personal body of work now contained and hopefully organized on the Web gives everyone who wants it the the opportunity for an expression of personal interest and achievement.
- Discussion- One of the great features of Web 2.0 is the discussion forum, which provides an environment for learning how to actually talk about things.
- Asynchronous Contribution- The abilty to contribute to discussions after class, or from home, provides a much broader opportunity for participation that the traditional class discussion. Students with different contribution styles, or who process information over time, are now more participative.
- Proactivity- Web 2.0 inherently rewards the proactive learner and contributor. The world has changed, and employers want and the world needs students who have learned to participate actively and independently. The “Web 2.0” child is much more likely to be able to work on things they like and is good at because of their willingness to be proactive.
- Critical Thinking- The vast amount of data on the Web requires more critical thinking than was needed years ago. In the era of “trusted authorities,” Time Magazine told everyone most of what was needed to know about the news. There was actually a lot more diversity of opinion on most topics than was reported which quickly becomes evident when you drill past the first page of a Wikipedia article and look at the discussion and history tabs.